User:Trossi01/Analytic philosophy/Rrobertrowan Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Trossi01


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Trossi01/Analytic_philosophy?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Analytic philosophy

Evaluate the drafted changes
I really like the tone and style you've used to add the main sections logical atomism, Ideal language and logical positivism. You've added a lot of important material that makes the article stronger while keeping it concise and easy for someone who has little to no background in the subject. I think you've definitely added information that makes the article stronger, more coherent, and informative. I also really like the hot links you put in. It only adds to the resources of the page and makes It even easier for users to understand the information being laid out for them. All the sources seem current and relevant to the topics and you've used the work of the main players of the discipline to ground the fundamental topics on the page while also citing their work. Only things I can think of to make it better would be to add in a few more sources. I know at the end of some of your additions you would cite the work at the end of the paragraph which I know is fine. It might make wikipedia more happy to cite each claim even if its from the same work in the paragraph, specifically in the ideal language and logical atomism sections. Also there are a few claims throughout the page that don't appear to have sources from what I can see. For example, "In contrast to earlier analytic philosophers (including the early Wittgenstein) who thought philosophers should avoid the deceptive trappings of natural language by constructing ideal languages, ordinary-language philosophers claimed that ordinary language already represents many subtle distinctions not recognized in the formulation of traditional philosophical theories or problems." This quote is from the ordinary language section and might benefit from a citation if you can track it down. Furthermore on this point, the meta-ethics section of the page has a lot of hot links but only one citation so it might help the page as a whole to track down the claims made in that section. Overall, I think the article is much better and more concise and written in a style that is very accessible.